The present invention relates generally to a device for applying compression and thermal treatment to a patient. The device is coupled to a therapeutic wrap that is worn by a patient. Generally, the therapeutic wraps are comprised of two fluid-tight chambers. The device is capable of filling one of the fluid-tight chambers of the wrap with a gas and may fill another fluid-tight chamber with a liquid that is varied in temperature in order to apply thermal and compression therapy to a patient. Such thermal and compression therapy is particularly suited to the treatment of patients recovering from injury or surgery as well as for the treatment and prevention of deep vein thrombosis, but may have other uses as well. The present invention offers patients the ability to utilize thermal therapy in combination with compression therapy, apply compression therapy without the thermal therapy system and maintain a record of the machine's operation.
Prior to the present invention, patients were forced to choose between purchasing or renting, on one hand, a single inseparable device that performed both compression and thermal therapy and, on the other hand, two separate devices, one for the application of compression therapy and the other for the application of thermal therapy. Each choice had significant drawbacks.
One particular drawback of the single, inseparable devices used in the application of compression and thermal therapy is their size and weight. Typically, the device used to supply the compression and thermal therapy includes a reservoir for holding a liquid, a thermal transfer system for heating and/or cooling a liquid, and a pump for pumping the liquid from the device to a wrap worn by a patient. The devices are also equipped with an air compressor for pumping a gas into a wrap worn by a patient. At least one controller is also provided in the device so that a patient may control the temperature, pressure, and duration, among other things, of the therapy. One such device is disclosed in U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0058911 (“the '911 application”) filed on behalf of Parish et al. All of the aforementioned components, as can be seen in the '911 application, along with batteries for powering the device, add to the significant bulk of the overall device.
It is common practice for patients seeking medical attention to seek a doctor located a significant distance away from the patient's domicile. In such instances, the patient may need to travel between the doctor's locale and the patient's domicile over the time period where at least compression therapy for the treatment and prevention of deep vein thrombosis is desired. With past devices, the patient was required to travel with the entire device, which was heavy and cumbersome as a result of the reservoir, thermal transfer system, air compressor and the controller that controls the fluid pump and air compressor being contained in a single, inseparable casing. Consequently, patients had to choose between traveling with the entire device on their person (particularly difficult when air travel was involved) and missing one or more therapy sessions. Missing therapy sessions could be very serious, potentially leading to the development of a pulmonary embolism.
The utilization of two separate devices also exhibited a number of drawbacks. For example, utilizing two separate devices required either two separate battery chargers, one for the thermal device and another for the compression device, or charging the batteries of the two devices sequentially. Having only one charger subjected the patient to the risk needing to use both devices, but only being able to charge and use one device. Requiring two charges added to the expense of the systems. Additionally, there was no reliable way to keep both the thermal system and the separate air compression system together because neither device connected to the other. The lack of connection increased the possibility that a patient would, when traveling, transport only one of the two required machines, or, while at home, misplace or lose one of the two machines.
A further problem relating to prior art machines is the inability of the patient (or a technician or other person) to track the operation of the machine. Typically, a doctor will prescribe particular parameters of use for the machine which the patient is supposed to follow. For example, a doctor may prescribe a patient to use the machine to supply thermal treatment twice a day and to supply compression treatment four times a day, each for thirty minutes per treatment. However, the prior art machines lacked the ability to store data relating to the actual time the machine operated or under what parameters the machine operated (such as temperature, compressive force and duration), and thus there was no reliable way to determine whether the doctor's prescription for use had been adequately carried out by the patient.
Prior art machines also had the added drawback of control panels that were affixed to the machine. That is, the control panel of the machine could not be removed from the machine without taking apart the machine, which usually requires tools, or without breaking the machine so that once removed, the control panel no longer functioned to control the machine. Nor were any of the prior art machines provided with any type of remote control device. Consequently patients using the machine had to access to the control panel located on the machine in order to control the operation of the machine. Such access was problematic in that the machines were generally placed on the ground, while the patient would be in a chair, often times subject to limited mobility while the machine was in use. Thus patients had great difficulty in reaching the controls of the machine, and often would require the assistance of another person, such as a nurse or caregiver, to change settings on the machine during use.